12 ms·
The IRS is a perennial budgeting football for Congress, even though it's one of the few agencies for whom increasing their budget creates positive net revenue f
by HillRat 2y ago
The IRS is a perennial budgeting football for Congress, even though it's one of the few agencies for whom increasing their budget creates positive net revenue for the federal government; its enforcement arm is down 30% in staffing since 2010, with predictably dismal results.
As an anecdotal comparison, I had a fairly long-running issue years ago with the IRS over a minor problem (some expenditures got posted to one fiscal year for the IRS, the following fiscal year for the SSA, which created an imbalance in their systems), and I was able to promptly get helpful folks on the phone and via scheduled in-person visits. Now even my CPA can't get anyone to pick up the phone there. It's a disaster.
- genter 2y agoOne of the major parties is deliberately sabotaging it (along with USPS, FDA, and NOAA) so they can point out how useless it is and it should just be shut down.
- lesuorac 2y ago[flagged]
- davidw 2y agoThey got wait times down: https://apnews.com/article/filing-season-irs-tax-day-taxpayer-4ad340b6dc83b4b4dce89658eda7bbd1 https://apnews.com/article/filing-season-irs-tax-day-taxpaye...
- akkartik 2y ago(Off-topic but I like your username: https://akkartik.itch.io/carousel https://akkartik.itch.io/carousel)
- lesuorac 2y agoWell, thats very close but I had a different carousel in mind when I reversed the spelling. You're the first person (afaik) to have figured out the name without it being explained to them though.
- fvrghl 2y agoA majority doesn't mean much these days. A supermajority is necessary to get things passed that the other side doesn't agree with [1]. The democrats haven't had a supermajority since 2011 [2]. [1] https://www.governing.com/context/how-did-the-senate-end-up-with-supermajority-gridlock https://www.governing.com/context/how-did-the-senate-end-up-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress
- lesuorac 2y agoMajority means as much as they want it to. The Cloture Rule is just a rule and such is modifiable with a simple majority (>50%) and has been rather recently so that judicial appointments could be made without needing 2/3 to override a filibuster. If Democrats wanted to actually govern without needing 2/3 of the votes in the senate they could've; however, much like the Republicans they aren't actually a homogenous block so removing the Cloture Rule would just demonstrate they aren't in agreement and look embarrassing (akin to Republicans not being able to agree on a speaker of the house).
- LorenPechtel 2y ago[flagged]
- baseballdork 2y agoHonestly can't keep up with the conspiracies and euphemisms. Which party is deliberately sabotaging it and how are they cheating?
- ceejayoz 2y agohttps://apnews.com/article/irs-treasury-tax-audit-income-7c10474b3129c11d28a3e6a6cb245743 https://apnews.com/article/irs-treasury-tax-audit-income-7c1... > Due to previous years of underfunding, the IRS had cut back on the auditing of wealthy individuals and the shifting of assets among partnerships and companies became common. https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-irs-was-gutted https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-irs-was-gutted > The effects of an explosion in tax cheating would be dire. The nation’s already soaring budget deficit would surge by hundreds of billions of dollars more, pushing it well past $1 trillion. Commissioners of the IRS, starting with President George W. Bush’s appointee, Douglas Shulman, have warned Congress about a crisis like this since the budget cuts began, in 2011. But after eight years, Republican lawmakers, who are chiefly responsible for the reductions, show no signs that they think the danger is urgent. By the time the danger becomes indisputable, immense harm will already have been done.
- the_gastropod 2y ago[flagged]
- mcmcmc 2y agoIt’s almost like the parties don’t matter, and the ruling class relies on political circus as a distraction
- silisili 2y agoDon't forget the USCIS. It takes a lot of time, patience, and skill to navigate the phone tree in a way that doesn't either end the call immediately, or tell you to visit the website and then end the call. I had a paper and pencil marking my choices so I'd remember what I'd tried, and it was nearly full by the end.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- nullserver 2y ago[flagged]
- gorbachev 2y agoYou forgot the EPA.
- giantg2 2y agoIs increasing the enforcement arm going to help with these questions? Also, they are increasing the inforcement arm substantially, to the point it should be above the 2010 levels.
- cchance 2y agoI'm sure cutting 20 BILLION in funding from them in the IRA isn't going to fuck over any of their internal processes or hiring
- lostdog 2y agoThe IRA started out adding $80b to IRS funding, and Republicans negotiated it down to $60b.
- throwaway48476 2y agoAs I recall the Republicans tried to add an ammendment that the $60b would only be used to target >$400k income but the democrats rejected it.
- lostdog 2y agoIs there a source, or is this made up?
- azemetre 2y agoA good rule of thumb is that if they didn’t include a source there likely isn’t one.
- throwaway48476 2y agohttps://thehill.com/policy/3594879-gop-rails-against-irs-funding-in-inflation-reduction-act/ https://thehill.com/policy/3594879-gop-rails-against-irs-fun... No need to be so cynical.
- jmclnx 2y agoI had friends and relatives who worked for the US IRS in the 80s, they all would say the IRS was the one place that budgets will never be cut, so the felt far more secure than I did in Tech. Little did they know the top 1% would get with one specific US Political Party to cut the IRS budget so thy can all cheat on their taxes. It is cheaper for them to hire lawyers than to pay their "fair share".
- Zelphyr 2y ago[flagged]
- XMPPwocky 2y agoWhere can I read more about this?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- QuercusMax 2y agoWhat kind of "families"? Crime families? Sources please.
- sandwitches 2y agoI see several massive I-beams in your argument that are buckling due to a lack of support. Mind shoring them up with sources, boss?
- doe_eyes 2y agoIt's a narrative that's easy to believe in because audit rates are going down. But when you think about it... why should be they going up? In the 1980s and before, the IRS literally had no way of knowing if you're telling the truth without auditing you. Everything was done on paper, cash was king. So the audits were indiscriminate and invasive, and needed a large army of employees to orchestrate. Now, the IRS knows almost everything about your finances. They get electronic data from your employers, your bank, your brokerage. Most of commerce is settled electronically. Paypal and Venmo send them your info if you receive more than $500 in a year. There is nothing to be gained by randomly auditing the average family if the numbers on their report match what the IRS knows. The IRS can zero in on specific activities, such as people claiming unusual business deductions. But they no longer need to routinely audit most of us, and they don't need funding to that effect.
- chrisco255 2y agoA better strategy would be to do away with income tax altogether and replace with something easier to comply with and enforce like a Federal sales tax. States that run on sales tax alone need only to collect revenue from businesses, which shrinks their staffing requirements. And since it's a straightforward % of sales, it's easier to audit as well.
- ssnover 2y agoThese are not 1:1 replaceable. Income tax is progressively structured where higher earners pay a larger percentage in income that falls into higher income brackets. Sales tax is a flat percentage which varies based on item category, not the cost of the item.
- godelski 2y agoAnd if you need evidence to see that this statement is true, look at states where there is no income tax. It isn't just blue skies in those states. But you might need to look into the details to see that more clearly. There's no free lunch
- chrisco255 2y agoOf course they are. 7 states in the union operate just fine without income tax including Washington, Texas, Florida, and Tennessee. People are net migrating to states without income tax. Income tax brackets are an excessive complication that are completely unnecessary for running government. You can simply make essentials like groceries and tuition tax free, and keep everything else a flat %. It works fine.
- mbrumlow 2y agoAll fine and dandy until somebody can’t stand that somebody makes more than them and wants to point out that because you make more and maybe even spend less that your overall tax to income rate is smaller than somebody else. Taxes are not just about revenue. It’s a political tool first. As the US government could just print money and dilute the value of the dollar as the tax. Recent moves that show it is political. Trump administration changed rules on how income is reported that affected blue states with high house prices and income tax without affecting red states with sales tax and low house prices much, by way of limiting the deduction of interest paid and state income tax on your federal tax bill. Meanwhile the current administration often says how bad trumps “tax cuts” where without even trying to undo the increased taxes on blue states.
- janalsncm 2y agoThe government could fix this issue. The problem is, the people who care about this (regular taxpayers) don’t matter. Or rather, people who care about getting this fixed haven’t shown themselves to be a significant voting block. I recommend anyone who calls their representatives to get their situation sorted out include “propose or vote for legislation to fix this or I will not vote for you” as an ultimatum. If you’re going to vote for them either way (or not vote for them either way) then it makes no difference if they fix the problem or not.
- oooyay 2y agoI don't really have anything substantive to say; really just stacking onto this. My tax payments are not "regular enough" for the IRS. I generally end up owing $15k at the end of the year. It's an inconvenience for me, but I'm happy to pay it since, you know, taxes pay for things to be done. These folks have the gall to charge me money for that now, with threatening letters to boot, suggesting that I should supplement my W2 tax contributions that my employer makes quarterly. Portland, the city I live in, mimicked this system entirely and now demands the same for smaller amounts. I'm left feeling that we gave these folks billions to make things better and the people they went after weren't billionaires; they're instead nickel and diming high income earners. I don't claim anything on my taxes, I don't have much (if any) business income, and I'm not married. I have the simplest taxes in the world and these folks can't advise my company on the correct amount they should deduct for taxes and I'm the one that gets a bunch of legalese in the mail. This to say, the billionaires running the system are certainly something but so are the people at the IRS who had an opportunity to actually do something with all that money. I look at them less with the lens of victims of partisanship and look at them more as part of the problem. In my case they know exactly how much money I've made quarter to quarter and could provide better advice to the company I work for. They also could have a system to notify me ahead of time so I have a chance to pay the bill they're expecting. They did none of these, but instead shook the couch for change.